What struck me about last nights programme was the lack of knowledge demonstrated about
the "Landsker Line",
The Linguistig divide has moved back and fore century after century.
At one point Treletert (Letterston) named it is said after Leotard was "beyond the
pale, to use an NI expression" but is now firmly above the Lamdsker.
English History, the history that the English want us to accept states that Wales was a
Wales has more Castles per square mile than any other part of the UK, and Pembrokeshire is
I believe at the top of the list.
Castles were a place of refuge, and not required if you felt you were in complete
In my opinion the Castles along the Landsker Line are a sign of weakness and not
A bolthole to retreat to, as a last resort.
In any event there is plenty of evidence, that those in power below the landsker
consolidated their power through marriage with the heiress of the local Welsh incumbent
(What the Pedigrees don't tell us, is whether they had despatched all her male
There is also evidence of intermarriage between North and South Pembrokeshire at least
from the mid 1500's onwards.
Ignorance is no defence, by what is supposed to be a Scientific and presumably
Historically accurate TV Programme.
I have recently been trading CFD's and largely ignoring all the advice my Broker
I told their "broker" that it appeared to me, that their advice was based on
sticking his finger up a Cat's arse and smelling it. (If it smelt of Fish the stock
would fall. If not your stock would rise.)
No different from having a pretty or ugly girl sit on your lap! And just as
The best we can hope for from DNA Cymru is to raise awareness in Genealogy, although that
is probably asking too much, as they do not emphasise the value of real Genealogical
research in tracing the line.
Message Received: Dec 07 2015, 06:04 PM
From: "Jennifer Cairns" <jennifercairns(a)yahoo.com>
To: "achwr(a)fsmail.net" <achwr(a)fsmail.net>
Cc: "Dyfdd List" <DYFED-L(a)rootsweb.com>, "DYFED"
<DYFED(a)rootsweb.com>, "Brian P. Swann" <bps(a)norvic8.force9.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Dyfed] DNA CYMRU on S4C
Only just managed to watch part III yesterday. I see what you mean. Seems to me that
your research might well fit the Cymrudna claimed pattern of clusters and theories (20
they claimed, and 10 researched in some depth they say) - but the tv programme is
extremely "thin". It is a pity they were not more specific in detail.
Their three cited examples of possible patriarch descent. Jim Williams (now living in
Llanybydder)... Llwele/ Rhydodyn / Hywel Dda / R1b-S300(L371).
Jim Cockburn Powell /Flint / CuneddaWledig / R1b-PF5191
Alexander Talbot Rice / Newton House; Dinefwr / Urien Rheged / G-Z674
Are we getting into the Old King Cole area here? but I can find no further info or the
slightest mention elsewhere of G-Z674, and I presume this snp is also R1b.
plus the Tudors via mtdna as no Ydna available - no haplogroups mentioned. They are still
NB the analytical review of this latest episode by Debbie Kennett in her Cruys blog
dated yesterday (5th December 2015) http://cruwys.blogspot.co.uk/
Your researched families fits the pattern... presumably if the Cymrudna videoo had
bothered to give haplogroup details of all the clusters discovered your patriarch links or
clusters might have been mentioned. The following you may have come across....
Marquis of Bath and his butler
Bones of Cheddar man had been excavated in 1903. In 1995 Prof. Brian Sykes (vide The
Seven Daughters of Eve, p 228 onwards and wiki) tested local villagers and his lordship to
try to trace any connections between them and the mtdna of Cheddar man. His lordships
butler was an exact match, as was a local headmaster but not the good Marquis. The
haplogroup was/is U5. His lordship was not apparently too upset (he of the
"wifelets") - but this does suggest that the crachach may not be the ones who
actually have the local deep rooted "patriarchal" connections. Note this
research was based on Mtdna, and not Ydna as the Cymrudna examples were.
It is all very interesting - but a long way to go yet I suspect. However, from my point
of view it does slightly open a door to a further examination of certain debated
"uchelwyr" family connections originally local (to me) but now with well known
From: yr achwr <achwr(a)fsmail.net>
To: Jennifer Cairns <jennifercairns(a)yahoo.com>; Eliz Hanebury
Cc: Dyfdd List <DYFED-L(a)rootsweb.com>; DYFED <DYFED(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, 3 December 2015, 18:36
Subject: Re: [Dyfed] DNA CYMRU on S4C
Forget about individual DNA Family DNA for the moment.
What surprised me was that the "experts" were surprised that there were
clusters appearing in the data, which made Wales very different from Scotland and
As someone who claims to have a knowledge of Pedigrees and West Wales Genealogy, and a
working knowledge of Welsh History, this does not surprise me.
There Pedigrees suggest that many lines in West Wales descend from what Bartrum calls a
In North Pembrokeshire (Cemmaes Hundred) particularly Gwynfardd Dyfed.
The descendants of Cadifor Fawr of Blaencych, appear mainly in North Pembrokeshire
(Cilrhedyn Hundred) and adjoining Hundreds in Carmarthenshire.
In South Cardiganshire you have Cadifor ap Diniawol centered on Llandysul and The
Lewis/Lewes of Abernant-bychan Family decended from Bradwen.
What is noticeable that the earliest extant records show that all these families who
claim descent from a Tribal Patriarch, all owned land in the area they claim their
Given that under Welsh Law before the Act of Union, Primogeniture did not exist, and land
was divided between Offspring equally, this makes perfect sense.
The main reason why estates in Wales in general were a lot smaller.
There is a hell of a lot of information on those who claim descent from these Tribal
Patriarchs, and can be traced with a little bit of effort down to the present day. This
explains the "in-explicable" according to the academics Clusters.
Brian - Shoot me down!